Secondary Navigation

2004 Hurricane Forecast

From the drought monitor I am interested in four main features of the global macrobiological electrical circuit as it relates to US landfalling cyclones.

Message 1 of 5
, Mar 31, 2004

From the drought monitor I am interested in four main features of the
global macrobiological electrical circuit as it relates to US
landfalling cyclones. First, the obvious one is tha the earth EMF
over the Hudson Bay has weakened. I could get into some detail WHY
but this is observed--so it is for another post. The second is CAP,
or the Colorado Arizona Project, which is a source of reduced flow of
water down the Colorado into the Gulf of California (GOC). In
between these two points of field and conductivity changes is a
subtropical jet, which has been highly weakened. As a result, there
has been a persistant drought in between the GOC and the Hudson Bay
node that you can see clearly in the drought monitor data.

Third, a dam was constructed in the Carolinas last year and there was
even a black algae patch seen off the Carolina coast. Fourth, there
was also level and delta lake construction projects in the
Mississippi last year and I assume further work this year. Much of
the result of the Mississippi changes in hydrology from human
influences resultes in the erosion of the delta and for the detritus
to flow more directly to the deeper portions of the Gulf of Mexico
(GOM) which results in very strong health of biogenic hydrates. The
algae seems to do quite well, too, and a red tide existed last year
north of the Yukatan in the GOM for much of the tropical storm
season. This area of convection and great conductivity was amplified
by the poor EMF in the SW, and connected, electrically, to the
instability over the Carolinas.

The connection was a looping kind that resulted in an offshore flow
and upwelling off the Carolinas. Isabel certainly did come and stir
and roil the waters which generally speaking reduces the chance for a
following year tropical storm, from a conductivity standpoint.
Indeed, that is what happened two years ago in the Mississippi delta
and caused me to correctly predict no landfalling in the Mississippi
delta last year.

My friend Steve MacDonald has completed a moon gravity wave analysis
of the tropical storm season. His analysis calls for an increased
level of roiling. So there is nothing from the moon to prevent a
continued connection as above.

John Daly's solar statistician Landstiedt (I probably do not spell
his name correctly) also calls for nothing interesting from a solar
standpoint, as in El Nino. This is interesting because NOAAs models
currently call for one. El Nino reduces hurricanes, but the
question, electrically, is not if there will be El Nino SSTs but if
there will be electrical patterns that prevent tropical storms from
landfalling. My view is they will not, and if you look at 1997, this
is extremely important, as all the storms, few as they were,
were "fish" storms and hooked harmlessly out to the North Atlantic.
My view is we certainly will indeed see a fish storm, perhaps the
first big CV one like Fabian, but once we get one, the global
electrical circuit will be ready for an electrical readjustment back--
which is when the danger for a US landfall occurs. Nothing in this
picture prevents another Carolina landfall. Indeed, with the
winter's fires and dust storms in West Africa and dams there,
upwelling currently with cold SSTs, we could have an extremely wet CV
season off the African coast, and waves coming off either to energies
existing CV storms or create another one.

The connection between the GOM, as described above, and Carolinas,
will exist again. The dry patch in Florida has grown, and the
residual black algae patch, the red tides there, have decreased.
Florida waters should be less conductive and hence thunderstorm
activity off Doran waves from a large TS won't cause a storm to be
pushed so far north, IMHO. Further, there was small volcanic activity
in the East Caribean this winter, and that should increase SOx based
marine macrobiology there. More conductive waters to the south means
that CV storms are more likely to go south. There are some other
things going on here, but I would not be surprised to see storms move
like Izzy did two years ago.

Early Allison like storm is likely. We continue to have low SOx and
the GOM is very conductive. It will all depend on when the moon
gravity wave comes through. Later, from blooms from roiling,
depending on the path, we could see an echo storm in the GOM. Later
in the season, the Izzy kind of storm becomes more likely. Florida
will see growing drought conditions and chances of fires in the fire
season.

The season will again be shifted and above well above averages of the
past 100 years. The W. Caribean will see a cat 4 or 5 storm later in
the year.

See:

http://drought.unl.edu/dm/monitor.html

Other comments:

1. Comments on William Gray's forecast:

http://hurricane.atmos.colostate.edu/forecasts/2003/dec2003/

According to the popular press, the leading forecaster in the world
on hurricanes is Dr. William Gray out of CSU. The above link is to
his more recent forecast. Gray is a skeptic, BTW. Macrobiology
requires a dynamic modulating large scale electrical features.
Macrobiology factors are much better explained in terms other than
air pressures and winds, much like the movements of the planets are
much better explained by the fact that the sun has more mass and the
force of gravity from it better described the movement of the
planets, despite what the dogma of the past was that the earth
revolved around the sun.

The PRIMARY flaw in all climate models is that they fail to couple
cloud behaviors, kinetics, if you will, with radiative and heat
trapping trends. Indeed, a more recent paper stated that what heat
dynamics should be given more green house gases recently hasn't been
matched with water vapor trends, which is in my opinion more
gaia . . . but I will leave that for another day here. Given this
primary flaw, Gray's correlative studies actually DO show coupling.
That is, given a certain condition, hurricanes are coupled to it.
This is a start, anyway. But we are still left with, given the narrow
approach, the sun circles around the earth approach, that ocean SSTs
can be over 84 degrees, and it can be in the middle of September, and
it can be as clear a sky as there is space in JBW's head. While Dr.
Gray is discussing a climate coupling, as opposed to the weather
coupling I am discussing, it is a step in the right direction because
he is capturing longer term electro static trends.

I do not directly use correlative statistics, and think that Gray's
approach is flawed because of a changing experience base, and what I
do use couples behaviors so strongly that I can go places where Gray
will not--like predicting a landfalling event. So, without much more
ado, lets go over Gray's Preditors and discuss them:

Predictor 1. November 500 MB Geopotential Height in the far North
Atlantic (+)

(67.5-85°N, 10E-50°W) Positive values of this predictor correlate
very strongly (r = -0.7) with negative values of the Arctic
Oscillation (AO) and the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). Negative
AO and NAO values imply more ridging in the central Atlantic and a
likely warm north Atlantic Ocean (50-60°N, 10-50°W). Also, on decadal
timescales, weaker zonal winds in the subpolar areas are indicative
of a relatively strong thermohaline circulation which is favorable
for hurricane activity. Positive values of this November index are
negatively correlated with both 200 mb zonal winds and trade wind
strength the following September in the tropical Atlantic. The
associated reduced tropospheric vertical wind shear enhances
conditions for TC development. Other features that are directly
correlated with this predictor are low sea level pressure in the
Caribbean and a warm North and Tropical Atlantic. Both of the latter
are also hurricane-enhancing factors.

Ocean current directions have different impedence meaning. The NAO is
no different. What then occurs is strong displacement currents will
elongate heat trapping cirrus trying to form, and cause, relatively
speaking, water vapor movements to where the ice forming is more
effective outside of the displacement current. Put another way, if an
ocean current inducts in such a manner as to bring electrons to the
surface, between that ocean surface and the relatively positively
charged ionosphere, ice trying to form elongates and doesn't take in
water vapor as well. Phase change energies relatively go elsewhere,
and that air has a tendency to fall, and pressures rise. Because this
region with warm currents and much ocean, as well as near the north
EMF pole(s) -- there is an ability to look at what is occurring with
the measures and make longer range predictions on how clouds will
behave later in the tropical
storm season.

Predictor 2. October-November SLP in the Gulf of Alaska (-)

(45-65°N, 120-160°W) Negative values of this predictor are strongly
associated with a positive Älaskan pattern" (Renwick and Wallace
1996) as well as a positive "Pacific North American Pattern" (PNA)
which implies reduced blocking over the central Pacific with
increased heights over the western United States. The negative mode
of this predictor is typically associated with current warm eastern
Pacific equatorial SST conditions which usually lead to cool ENSO
conditions the following year. Low sea level pressure is observed to
occur in the Gulf of Alaska with a decaying El Niño event, and
anomalously high pressure is observed with a weakening La Niña event
(Larkin and Harrison 2002). Negative values of this predictor
indicate that La Niña conditions are likely the following year which
tends to enhance Atlantic hurricane activity.

This is a good place to discuss ENSO and hurricanes. A hurricane is a
unique electrical coupling between the ionosphere and the tropical
oceans. It occurs typically from a wave that in a broader sense
relies on the entire global electrical circuit. The tropics contain
the warmest, most conductive currents, and hence where the largest
electrical instabilities or storms can be expressed. This is why a
hurricane can hit New York--because it is close to a large and
conductive ocean current, the Gulf Stream, despite it having a
location far north of were the largest radiative and heat trapping
energies occur in the tropics. The biggest wind pattern in the
tropics is the SOI, or Southern Oscillation index. This index will,
like the NAO, change induction, as well as gas exchanges, which then
impact conductivities and, again, how water vapor forms on heat
trapping cirrus or not. Pulses of electrical currents can move along
the tropics and aid in formation of North Atlantic storms with much
better effectiveness given the La Nina state, and this much has been
well correlated. What I have seen specifically, when a strong
negative SOI trends strongly positive--that is when the most likely
time to see a tropical storm form in the Atlantic. If an El Nino is
occurring--the values basically stay negative and no storms form.

Predictor 3. September 500 MB Geopotential Height in Western North
America (+)

(35-55°N, 100-120°W) Positive values of this predictor correlate very
strongly (r = 0.8) with positive values of the PNA. PNA values are
usually positive in the final year of an El Niño event (Horel and
Wallace 1981). Therefore, cooler ENSO conditions are likely during
the following year. Significant lag correlations exist between this
predictor and enhanced geopotential height anomalies in the
subtropics during the following summer. High heights in the
subtropics reduce the height gradient between the tropics and
subtropics resulting in easterly anomalies at 200 mb throughout the
tropics which favor hurricane development.

This is another El Nino factor, but if there was something I tried to
make clear to everyone here that since El Nino is poorly defined for
what it is, how it COUPLES with cloud behaviors of any sort is
likewise so flawed.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/methanehydrateclub/message/2134

So, I am going to use this as an opportunity to teach about how
clouds uncouple thermally given macrobiological changes. The above
link is also discussing the same geographical area, and what are
called the Santa Ana winds. These winds end up causing upwelling and
colder SSTs. Normally, one would then think that will colder SSTs we
would see less rain--but as it turns out, at some point rains come,
the oceans heat up by cloud behaviors, just like an La Nina turns
into an El Nino. From a thermal standpoint, it makes no sense that
something cold becomes warm and something warm becomes cold UNLESS
there is a counterforcing. That forcing is biological. Upwelling
leads to greater nutrient

content and that leads to increases in conductiivty, DESPITE the fact
that decreases in ocean surface temperature, independant of life,
would lead to LESS conductivity. Life is your source of a flip flop.
A Santa Ana, and cold SSTs, like we have right now off the coast of
California, will be a sign of changing weather patterns down the
road!

Predictor 4. July 50 MB Equatorial U (-)

(5°S-5°N, 0-360) Easterly anomalies of the QBO during the previous
July indicate that the QBO will likely be in the west phase during
the following year's hurricane season. The west phase of the QBO has
been shown to provide favorable conditions for development of
tropical cyclones in the deep tropics according to Gray et al. (1992,
1993, 1994) and Shapiro (1989). Hypothetical mechanisms for how the
QBO affects hurricanes are as follows: a) Atlantic TC activity is
inhibited during easterly phases of the QBO due to enhanced lower
stratospheric wind ventilation and increased upper-troposphere-lower-
stratosphere wind shear, and b) for slow moving systems, the west
phase of the QBO has a slower relative wind (advective wind relative
to the moving system) than does the east phase. This allows for
greater coupling between the lower stratosphere and the troposphere.

This is a place where I can say without doubt that Dr. Gray's
speculation here is fundimentally flawed. The state of the global
electrical circuit as expressed by very very low pressure winds above
the tropics are fundimentally about the state of the global electric
circuit and how that circuit moves a conductor. Since the QBO is not
dense AND conductive, its low mass can be motivated in an EMF, just
like an electric motor is turned in a current. This movement
conceptually follows Fleming's LEFT hand rule. Because tropical
storms are electro static in organization, the become less likely to
occur given a QBO state because it reflects global electrical circuit
extremes.

Predictor 5. September-November SLP in the Gulf - SE USA (-)

(15-35°N, 75-95°W) This feature is strongly related to the following
year's August-September sea level pressure in the tropical and
subtropical Atlantic. August-September SLP in the tropical Atlantic
is one of the most important predictors for seasonal activity, that
is, lower-than-normal sea level pressure is favorable for more TC
activity. Low pressure in this area during September-November
correlates quite strongly with the positive phase of the PNA. In
addition, easterlies at 200 mb throughout the tropical Atlantic are
typical during the following year's August-September period with low
values of this predictor.

The question I would ask is--how are electrical currents flowing?
Cold oceans don't mean ppoor electrical flow, and at the same time,
warm SSTs don't mean anything, either, because biological activity
from upwelling of depletion of those nutrients after warming and
upwelling ends, can mean relative reduction in conductivity. Again,
correlations can be drawn, but the more important question is--what
do they MEAN?

Predictor 6. November SLP in the Subtropical NE Pacific (+)

(7.5-22.5°N, 125-175°W) This feature is also strongly related to the
following year's August-September sea level pressure in the tropical
and subtropical Atlantic. High pressure in this area correlates with
low sea level pressure in the tropical Atlantic and easterly
anomalies at 200 mb during the following August through September
period. According to Larkin and Harrison (2002), high pressure in
this area appears during most winters preceding the development of a
La Niña event. High pressure in this region forces stronger trade
winds in the east Pacific which increases upwelling and helps
initiate La Niña conditions which eventually enhance Atlantic
hurricane activity during the following summer. In addition, this
predictor correlates with low geopotential heights at 500 mb
throughout the tropics the following year which is also
favorable for more hurricane activity in the Atlantic.

This again is about where at 500 MB cirrus are found, and 200 mb is
where the ionosphere starts to become interesting, and shows how the
sub tropical jet is going to behave, in all likelihood, given bio
electrical trends.

What looks to be a factor I am looking at this year, compared to Dr.
Gray's "predictors"?

We do know that per Fleming's right hand rule and impedance
guidelines, that the Equatorial currents will put electrons on the
ocean surface. Put another way, there is a positive vector downwards
into the ocean just based on the direction of current. Since opposits
repel, we should expect, then, for the carbon monoxide, which carries
a negative charge, to repel against the Equatorial and move
elsewhwere. Conversely, over the ionosphere where there is little
convection in the Equatorial regions, the ionosphere is particularly
positive. In other words, this is a region with fair weather voltages
to ground--about 100 to 250 volts per meter as measured emperically.
Africa is the most struck places on earth, so there is plenty of
charges taken out of the lower ionsphere nearby for this to be
particularly true along the warm, and therefore conductive waters of
the Equatorial, and South America during the period of December thru
February also has thunderstorms which will take negative charges out
of the air. So, since opposits attract, why won't the ozone move over
the Equatorial toward the ionosphere? Then factor in ambiant winds,
pressures, rain patterns, inversion layers--it's all too complicated
of a mess, right?

However, the BIOLOGICAL impact that is important here will only be
relative to the ocean. Thus, while some carbon monoxide may indeed be
attracted to the fair weather zones of the Equatorial regions of the
ionosphere, the carbon monoxide that is moving toward the positive
charges to the surface of the ocean is what will matter later in
terms of blooms associated with the ashe material that starts food
chains. That movement is at this time of season going to be to the S.
Atlantic's ITCZ--where the current moves from east to west and
inducts a positive current to the ocean surface. Plus, relative to
the land ocean interface, there is likewise such a positive to ground
impact. Furthermore, the smoke initinally probably drops the phase
change temperature of cirrus, along with causing elongation in any
capactive field, such that water vapor would tend to diffuse to
places where convection would more easiliy occur. In short, we see
what we see by the Sahel, below.

As many of you may well know by now I do a hurricane forecast around
April 1, and the past three years it has been the best in the world,
using the electro static gaia concepts I have poorly attempted to
communicate to this fixed set of mindsets here. For instance, last
year at this time I predicted the Carolina tropical storm
landfalling. The reason I am able to make these predictions is
because the systems discussed are coupled electrically, describing
cloud behaviors in a much more effective manner than coupling merely
thermally cloud behaviors, and, more importantly, the modulations,
which too are electrical, bring a determinism to an essentially
complex and chaotic problem. My expectations are low, and while I
hope for discussion, I don't expect it.

Non-the-less, here is a preview, just for you all. I have been
watching fires and dust storms in West Africa--which are probably
connected to the dams there. Anyway, the soot runs out to the ocean
and will impact the biosphere were the CV storms begin in a
macroscopic manner.. Carbon monoxide is also electrical in its
character and will impact cloud nucleation rates the same way that
other ions do--and SSTs cooled where the carbon monoxide patterned,
and patterned electrically in how it did impact those SSTs. Those
SSTs as cooled later lead to upwelling and more biological material
for later in the CV season.

Same thing happened w/ the Florida fires and we had black algae
patches off the W. Keys and tropical storms and heavy rains
associated with the drought and fires they had. I was able to make
some particularly accurate long range predictions based on that black
algae patch a few years ago . . .

The CV season could be outragous--because the biological boost comes
with dams that delay the sed and flow of nutrients from what should
be a rainy year for them given what soot and ash has deposited in the
nearby oceans and how that acts to cause blooms and increases in
macro conductivities.

I have some analysis about where these CV storms will go and what
will happen early in the GOM, but this is the main scoop--fires and
dust storms in Africa impacting the CV area.

On 19 January 2004 another cyclonic circulation developed in the
South Atlantic Ocean just east of Salvador, Brazil. Satellite images
and scatterometer winds (indicating tropical storm strength) are
presented below. Here is satellite pictures of the second tropical
cyclone to ever form in the south Atlatnic ocean!

What needs to be appreciated about the IR and visable shots is the
half circle of dots of clouds around the storm--this is where it gets
its electrical pattern from--the charge separations of convection
make the ionosphere around the storm relatively positive. Plus it is
in the form of a "wave" in that the ITCZ extends to Africa, where
there is also convection in particular on the terresphere.

Here where there is more information:

http://www.met-office.gov.uk/sec2/sec2cyclone/tcimages/Misc/

There was a good solar wind event, as David points out here, that day
and the days preceeding it:

South of the storm, a good algae bloom occurred and was seen on sat
three days before the storm. Because of the counter current there,
the circumpolar which normally inducts against cirrus production by
its direction and orientation of the earth EMF, anomaly warm air
temperatures and melting bergs have been seen. Again, algae is more
conductive than the oceans because in order to maintain hydrostatic
pressure by osmosis, the algae must be more ionized then the ocean
the creatures are contained in.

"http://www.john-daly.com/soi-mnth.gif

Note the SOI on the 19th swinging positive to negative. This is
something you see with big electrical events in the Atlantic as it
impacts the SOI. In fact, it qued the small negative readings we saw
at the end of the month. I suspect more effect then cause on the SOI
as this is a big electro mechanical event--a storm this size.

Steve MacDonald actually pointed out the storm to me in one of his
moon gravity wave presentations about a month ago, but I didn't know
that this was an actual tropical storm. The gravity wave began in the
South Pacific and actually was headed toward the southern tip of S.
America and then went northeast over Southern South America until it
went right over the area of the tropical storm. My view is once over
the S. Atlantic the gravity wave caused a gas exchange increase in
conductivity relative to the ITCZ and you got the convection of the
ITCZ to support, electrically, an electrical pattern of this
magnetude. I wish I had the actual pictures from Steve MacDonald to
link for the fair reader, because you cannot meaningfully see the
overlay of gravity wave (moon position) and cloud behavior, knowing
it is all about capacitive coupling and displacement currents, and
not see that something is going on there. Once the gravity wave was
over on the S. Atlantic side--boom. The cloud mass exploded. Now, I
realize I think and understand way better than I write this, but the
roiling gas exchanges from the gravity wave from the moon isn't going
to do anything over land--as the land isn't stirred by the moon to
cause a gas exchange change in conductitivy--so it is really
interesting that once the moon's gravity wave substantially crossed
over South America--that's when the cloud explosion occurred.

http://www.nrlmry.navy.mil/tc_pages/tc_home.html

Here is a good link on the first hurricane ever in the S. Atlantic.
It's a dated link from the Navy. The storm is called 01L.NONAME
because the S. Americans have no set terms for catagorizing such
storms.

What is interesting is the solar wind was as elevated as we have seen
in a long time--following a lull. Read David's report:

http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/methanehydrateclub

What's interesting globally is there was a cat 4 to hit OZ and our
dry snap ended with the storm below that I described. Now, the solar
wind up like this impacted this storm because it was forecasted to
last 24 hours and we had rain for THREE days. Last night over the
tornado ally there was almost a 10,000 strike event to go w/ TS
there.

Above link ENSO based long range forecast. This forecast is
statistical. I will give a causal explaination. What happens with La
Nina like conditions is prevailing winds (Santa Anna, off shore) for
us here in No Cal up to Washington mean blooms and algae patches that
cause cloud dynamics that both compress air (heating) and increase
precip by the mechanisms as described below.

http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/data/anomnight.3.20.2004.gif

SST anomalies along our coast are warm otherwise except for the area
of upwelling--but note that despite that the SSTs are cold just there
along the coast, they are relatively more conductive because of the
bloom, despite the fact that colder oceans are less conductive than
warmer. IOWs, here you have this extremely rare hurricane in the the
South Atlantic and SSTs are COLD anomaly. Thermodynamics alone does
not explain!

Space weather--or electo particles from the sun--is slow at this time:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/methanehydrateclub/message/2138

for an existing storm like this--recall that voltages that are moved
along the closed isobars of the earth EMF are quite small and the
nearby strikes and thunderstorms patterned to the east are going to
have a larger influence--this gets to signal noise and what level of
electrical energy from space is enough to pattern clouds given
electrical conditions on earth near where it might matter.

For those really interested in full electro cloud dynamic, check out
this link:

http://www.lightningstorm.com

for current strike data. Just because there are no strikes along the
coast doesn't mean there isn't a DC field from ionosphere to ocean or
some charge separations and negative voltages to ground with
convection along our coast. Keep in mind, too, that the north EMF
pole has a node over Hudson Bay, and that strikes are FRACTAL
evidence of large scale waves of ionospheric alternating voltages.

Explaination. I live, as you may know, in Redding California.
Notice from the above map the algae bloom along the Northern
California Coast. What I observed on radar from a storm that came in
is cloud avoided the area over the dense algae patch. What was
happening is there was a coupling between ionosphere and ocean there,
and cirrus elongated and hence convection formed poorly there. Water
vapor diffused east and west and created instability in the clouds
and compressed the clouds as the flow of diffusing water vapor was
counter to the circulation. I have saved a TWC radar shot of the
clouds from the storm if any one is interested.

This helps the macrobiosphere there where the algae patch is because
it causes precip and eventually river run off (nutrients) to the same
place where the algae exist, and at the same time keeping the area
cloud free for light to aid in photosynthesis.

3. Isabel Analysis.

There are many papers written, and sometimes it is long before
society has any idea how important that paper is:

http://www.ichmt.org/abstracts/Vim-01/abstracts/04-01.pdf

"The effects of electric field on ice crystal growth had been
numerically discussed by Scishcheve and Kusalike6-7. They announced
that the strength of an electric field able to change the ice lattice
from normal ice(Ih) to cubic ice (Ic) should be at least 10 to the
5th kV/m [fair weather voltages are about 10 to the -1 k volts per
meter]. However, the strength of the electric field used in our
experiments was only 1/400 of the 10 to the 5th kV/m [fair weather
voltages would be on order of 1/1,000,000 of these voltages, whereas
w/ tropical storm transiants above the eye, the transiant ratios
would be similar to the experiments]. Thus, the morphological change
of the ice in this study was not caused by the ice lattice change.
Without the electric field, the crystal growth process could be
considered as a process whereby the water molecules are added one by
one to the crystal lattice. This 'adding' process has normally the
same probability in all directions, and leads to the formation of the
symmetric ice crystal [figure omitted]. However, when a high voltage
field is applied, the electric field may cause different molecules in
the DMSO solution[a weak acid--what should be noted is rain water is
slightly acidic from the CO2 and other particles that get dissolved
in the air--with a pH of about 5.6] to exhibit different behaviors.
The polar water molecules/clusters may be torqued and rearranged
under the action of the electric field and forced to joining the
lattice in a special orientation and position. Hence, different
growth rates occur in different directions and the ice crystal
becomes asymmetric. Under the action of an electric field, the water
molecules may rearrange and line up end to end in the direction of
the electric field. In viewing the crystal structure, this well-
ordered water molecules/clusters seems like crystal or quasi-
crystallines. In this case the water molecules/clusters possess an
ideal situation for rapid crystal growth. That may be the reason why
the main branches, which are parallel to the direction of the
electric field, grow faster than the other branches."

Once there in fact is experimental proof of a different growth rate
by EMF dynamics, which there is ABOVE, you can infer that in a
hurricane, where there are known DC fields of the same scale as in
these Chinese experiments on ice formations in DC fields, with the
ocean spray from 150 plus MPH winds containing all the ions needed
and matching what was in the experiment. What then happens are
asymmetric changes where water vapor goes due to the growth rates--to
the more symmetrical forming cirrus. In other words, diffusion
pressure will cause a movement of water vapor toward the clouds NOT
in the strong DC capactive field--meaning not in the eye, because the
eye contains no cloud cover, no water to form a strong dielectric
that would instead exist in the clouds. Phase change energies are
then organized. The eye is where DC fields have been OBSERVED. This
is published, peer reviewed science. It is science I am not
publishing, only science I am pointing out.
Electrically, the storm is organized.

On September 13, 2003, for instance, the Air Force Reserve Hurricane
Hunters made several of their 39 center fixes on Hurricane Isabel.
That day the NOAA Hurricane Hunters made two formal center fixes and
flew seven research missions into the storm. The highest winds
measured by the aircraft were 158 kt (Air Force at 700 mb) and 157 kt
(NOAA at 8400 ft) between 1700-1730 UTC 13 September. A 156-kt flight-
level wind (700 mb) was also observed at 1719 UTC 12 September.
Stronger winds were observed on eyewall dropsondes, with a maximum of
203 kt reported at 806 mb (4500 ft) at 1753 UTC 13 September. This is
the strongest wind ever observed in an Atlantic hurricane, although
it likely does not represent a 1-min average. Given the multiple
mesovortices, if you think of those like tornadoes, even 300 mph
isn't that hard to believe. That speed in kts represents a MPH wind
speed of 233.45 MPH. Here's a picture of the 13th when those record
readings were made:

What you should notice about the mesovortices from an IR standpoint
is the symmetry.

Down below I will point out what that means to Prof.
Kassin's "analogy".

The circle of the eye relates to the electrical charge organization
of the storm inside the eye. This organization comes from the fact
that the roiling winds are in somewhat of a circular path (there is a
Nature paper by Bates et all on gas exchanges during Hurricane Felix
from 1999)--and gas exchanges increase conductivities and the eye
itself offers a dielectric of air compared to water. What you see
very clearly from these images is a point NEGATIVE ionopsheric event,
with the positive voltages in the ionosphere above the storm in a
ring, yet still inside the eye. The extremely positive charges
couple to negative charges on the surface and ice in the center of
the mesovortices elongates--the mesovortices conform to this
organization in their centers falling and and rising air around them,
and then in their movement in a circle inside the eye.. The storm
becomes progressively ellipse as opposed to circular the further away
from the electrically organizing center the cirrus disk is.

Because the main organizing forcing in climate is ELECTRICAL, as so
demonstrated above, this has profound implications on Gaia theory and
abiogenesis

I like this Hartmann/Fu paper best. Check out figure on page 22
entitled Net Cloud Radiative forcing. This tells you how important
cloud dynamics are in heat dynamics.
Thankfully, the complexities of cloud heat retention is simplified,
visually, by IR loops. I use them all the time to seen how the EMF is
altering cirrus when watching a hurricane real time.

Strikes do not occur in cirrus disk, because one, dielectric of water
in disk eighty times that of air in cyclops eye, and charge
separations from convection bringing positive voltages to upper cloud
mass finds a relatively more positive ionosphere and lower cloud with
negative charges finds relatively negative charges on ocean surface.
Cirrus in the disk are elongated in displacement current. This
occurrence can even be seen in smaller scale in the 5 vortices and
thinner but clearly seen cirrus cover inside the eye highlighting the
vortices. The center of each of the vortices is clear of clouds, and
the IR picture appears as 5 circles in a circle, with, again, the
dielectric difference between air and water playing the part in where
the capacitive coupling takes place. More visuals:

http://www.sunsetbreezes.com/s/GOES030912-1145ir.jpg

http://www.sunsetbreezes.com/s/isabeleye09121145vis.jpg

If a coupling takes place, the orientation of cirrus is to cause them
be inside a field which prevents cloud nucleation and cirrus heat
trapping feedbacks.

http://newsletter.dri.edu/1999/spring/Lightning.html

There is little or no strike activity inside a hurricane.

http://www.nalms.org/glossary/lkword_c.htm

"When supercooled water and ice crystals occur at the same location,
the ice grows at the expense of the water, and an ice cloud forms.
This occurs because at a given temperature ice has a greater affinity
than liquid water for water vapor. Cloud droplets and ice crystals
first form on certain types of small particles of dust or other
airborne materials. They are called condensation nuclei when water
droplets are formed and ice nuclei when ice crystals result. The
nuclei generally range in size from as small as 0.01 micrometer to
about 1 micrometer (4/10,000,000 to 4/100,000 inch). The number of
nuclei vary widely, depending on the source of the air mass in which
the parcel is imbedded. The atmosphere over the ocean generally has
the lowest number of nuclei, whereas polluted air has the highest.
The more nuclei, and therefore the more water droplets or ice
crystals, the slower the process of formation of precipitation-sized
particles, because the competition for the available water is
greater. Thus, although Rain often falls shortly after a cloud forms
over the ocean, a much longer time is required over continental
areas."

The China paper tells us that in a strong DC field the cloud
microphysics become asymmetrical. That means, because the ionosphere
is relatively positively charged from thunderstorms separating out
charges, and bringing negative voltages to ground in the form of
strikes. (From the image above the key thing to see is how the eye is
circular with the idea that the ionosphere has a point NEGATIVE
condition, with a ring of POSITIVE ions around it over the centers of
the mesovortices.)

Knowing that water vapor has a stronger dielectric constant is also a
necessary primer when talking about what you can pick up from the
clouds, electrically, in terms of the patterns that are occurring.
But let's keep it simple. Opposites attract. So a static field of
positive voltages will attract negative--and if you are coupling from
ionosphere to ocean, if the ionosphere is negative, the ocean will
experience magnetic flux that brings positive voltages to the
surface. How the ocean and ionosphere couple, or connect from a
capacitive description depends on the charges, the area of
the "plates" and the dielectric between the "plates". Now, I realize
I simplify, but there is a huge difference between how the fields in
the ionosphere and on the ocean surface couple between air with water
and air with air. About an 80 times difference. And BTW when ice
crystals are involved, there may even be more complexity (which gets
to how life could have a very strong impact on what is going one) in
that the ice forms little mini capacitors that can behave here much
like doping in an amplifying transistor. So let's keep it simple for
the moment--there is a huge difference between water and air as a
dielectric, and since phase change energies cumulated over a large
area will bring relative energies and organize that area thermally,
you couple electrical and thermal, electrical and Boyle's laws.

This gets to electrostatics. Recall that the same signs repel and
positive and negative charges attract one another.

"The plasma experiment involves the creation of a confined pure
elecron plasma in a cylindrical trap, with a uniform axial magnetic
field providing radial confinement."

Since water has a relatively much stronger dielectric constant
compared to air, just over the eye of a hurricane, the charges in the
ionosphere will couple with the oceans--and you have in essance the
very same trap as in the plasma experiment. Please tell me if you
cannot follow this, and I will explain it further to you and draw
more schematics for you.

"Once produced the confined plasma evolves due to the drift flow,
which is determied by the cross product of the electrical and
magnetic fields (i.e., E * B drift).The drift flow is two dimensional
in a plane perpendicular to the axis of the cylinder. Since the drift
velocity changes the electron density according to an equation
identical to the inviscid from of the voticity equation (3.4) and
since the electron density is related to the Lapacian of the
electrostatic potentical, the two dimensional equations for the
evolution of the electron plasma are isomorphic with the two-
dimensional Euler equations for inviscid incompressible flow
(electron density vorticity and electrostatic potential
streamfunction). Peurrung and Fajans (1993), Huang and Driscoll
(1994), Fine et al. (1995). "

The problem as I see it as the EMFs act on the cloud microphysics the
flows become viscous and Euler's equations are not helpful. But
conceptually and basically, if at a point pressure is high, air wants
to expand away, low, air wants to be drawn in. So a low pressure
point will chase a high pressure point, just like a negative charge
will chase a positive charge. High and low pressure areas in the
oceans have electrical properties in that high pressures bring
positive voltages to ground and couple to electrons to the oceans
surface, which elongates forming ice crystals, whereas over
convective regions ice forms more symetically and capactivie
couplings are prevented by the strong dielectric of water compared to
air.

David

... Where?? ... That s true for the solar outlook. We re in the declining phase of the sunspot cycle, so you can expect relatively quiet conditions for a few

Message 2 of 5
, Mar 31, 2004

> Third, a dam was constructed in the Carolinas last year

Where??

> John Daly's solar statistician Landstiedt (I probably do not spell
> his name correctly) also calls for nothing interesting from a solar
> standpoint, as in El Nino.

That's true for the solar outlook. We're in the declining phase of
the sunspot cycle, so you can expect relatively quiet conditions for a
few more years yet. Look for the cycle to bottom out in early 2007,
although there will likely be short bursts of acctivity along the way.

> Nothing in this
> picture prevents another Carolina landfall. Indeed, with the
> winter's fires and dust storms in West Africa and dams there,
> upwelling currently with cold SSTs, we could have an extremely wet CV
> season off the African coast, and waves coming off either to energies
> existing CV storms or create another one.
>

Are you talking about an Outer Banks brusher, something that comes a
bit deeper in like Floyd or Dean, or a direct hit like Hugo?

mike@usinter.net

... Mid S. Carolina. Don t recall the river. It was a reconstruction project. ... spell ... solar ... for a ... way. We aren t at the valley, either. In

>
> > Third, a dam was constructed in the Carolinas last year
>
> Where??

Mid S. Carolina. Don't recall the river. It was a reconstruction
project.

>
> > John Daly's solar statistician Landstiedt (I probably do not

spell

> > his name correctly) also calls for nothing interesting from a

solar

> > standpoint, as in El Nino.
>
> That's true for the solar outlook. We're in the declining phase of
> the sunspot cycle, so you can expect relatively quiet conditions

for a

> few more years yet. Look for the cycle to bottom out in early 2007,
> although there will likely be short bursts of acctivity along the

way.

We aren't at the valley, either. In terms of signal noise, there is
still enough from the flaring events we have to cause an
amplification required to bring a storm. A larger factor would
actually be SOx because w/ a good volcanic event, the SOx drops the
phase change temperature of the cirrus and you don't get separation
of charges--and a thunderstorm near the magnetic poles is going to
have WAY more electrical significance than the solar wind.

>
> > Nothing in this
> > picture prevents another Carolina landfall. Indeed, with the
> > winter's fires and dust storms in West Africa and dams there,
> > upwelling currently with cold SSTs, we could have an extremely

wet CV

> > season off the African coast, and waves coming off either to

energies

> > existing CV storms or create another one.
> >
>
> Are you talking about an Outer Banks brusher, something that comes a
> bit deeper in like Floyd or Dean, or a direct hit like Hugo?

That's a good question, but let me try to explain what we know and
how you may be able to answer your own question. Electrically, the
Gulf Stream is extremely warm--and full of life. Therefore, it
presents a conductive path that a storm could follow--if a storm was
just merely it's local winds. But indeed a tropical storm is a
regional EVENT where thunderstorms a thousand miles away are
connected to its behavior. And a tropical storm is global to the
extent that it begins to couple so strongly between ionosphere and
ocean that it begins to be influenced by earth's EMF. In the case of
Isabel, Fabian had two weaks beforehand gone NW out to the European
node of the earth EMF. This caused that area to be like charged as
Fabian, and created a relative opposing sign to the node over Hudson
Bay. Therefore, the storm began to plot to North America--not
because of winds but because of the earth EMF. A fair weather strip
connected the GOM to the Carolina coast, and there were some moon
roiling things going on, too, but it is enough to say that given the
hydrates off the coast of the Carolinas, the Gulf Stream, AND the
condition of the earth EMF, there was no other place for the voltages
of the storm to go. That is why once it landfell there were about
30k strikes pointing right to Hudson Bay from the GOM.

The pattern is almost the same I have been observing, and nothing is
there to tell me that we can't have a similar pattern. Of course,
the moon gravity wave can happen at a different date of the season,
but from what Steve MacDonald was saying, we should get a similar
gravity wave from the moon as last year.

Because of the lack of volcanic activity, I would suspect another
rain making storm, as SOx reduces the phase change temperatures of
the cirrus.

David

... Ok. I knew there hadn t been any new dams built in a long time. For SC, the Santee-Cooper complex is by far the biggest lake/river system. The Santee

Ok. I knew there hadn't been any new dams built in a long time. For
SC, the Santee-Cooper complex is by far the biggest lake/river system.
The Santee river flows into Lake Marion, which then flows into Lake
Moultree. Both lakes were dammed back in the WW2 era for
hydroelectric power. At the time, it was the biggest earth-moving
project ever. Lake Moultree drains into the Cooper River, which
empties into Charleston Harbor.

The Lake Moultree dam, if memory serves, is an earthen dam, and I can
remeber about 20 years ago that it almost gave way during a period of
prolonged, heavy rain.

The other major dam in the middle part of the state would be the Lake
Murray Dam, which is northwest of Columbia, and lies on the Saluda
River. The Saluda River eventually flows into the Santee River. That
dam was finished in 1930, and was also built for hydroelectric power.

mike@usinter.net

I was in a conversation on another bb with Greg Staff and he asked some good questions about my forecast. I sent him pictures of TWC radar from a storm that

Message 5 of 5
, Apr 10, 2004

I was in a conversation on another bb with Greg Staff and he asked
some good questions about my forecast. I sent him pictures of TWC
radar from a storm that hit us mid March. I have that picture in our
photos, here. Also, the natural hazards NOAA link pictures an algae
bloom off the coast just west of here such that the clouds are NOT
over the algae patch, and were like that all morning as the storm
rolled in. Here is our exchange:

Thanks for sending the algae bloom and the radar files. I have a few
comments (of course).

1) These are moments in time. Without a loop it's impossible to tell
anything.
For the moment, you are going to have to trust my observation of the
event. You have there one single frame, but what I OBSERVED was the
areas above algae patch as cloudless for the several hours I watched
it. If you recalled, I posted TWC link as it was happening real time
and told everyone here to watch what I was seeing.

2) It appears the algae bloom may go quite a bit further north and
south, but it's hard to tell because of the cloud cover.
The bloom runs all the way to the Bay Area and north into Oregon.
Where I want you to look at is that "bump" were there is a decreased
algae concentration--as that is where the clouds came ashore. What
we are talking about in a strong DC capacitive coupled field is water
vapor DIFFUSING and that is why you have the increases in cloud
density on either side of the algae patch. Further, since water is
about 80 times the dielectric as air, the feature then causes "waves"
or Doran waves as I like to call them, from large scale varying
capacitive coupling that goes on from the area of strongest coupling.

Even with that one frame you have, the odds of the clouds conforming
to the algae patch like that by chance is next to nothing. It begs
as to why the algae patch would match the clouds above. You could
couple them in another way, I suppose, by saying that the sustained
winds that created the upwellings that caused the algae patch also
cause the cloud pattern. However, winds here shift when storms come
in--the off shore flow is with fair weather . . .

3) Last year I saw clouds that looked like horses, but the Broncos
still had a bad season.
I am a huge Viking fan and we have never won a super bowl, so don't
bitch.

Since my hurricane prediction format doesn't suit you, are you going
to post your April Fools day Hurricane forecast?

My forecast is at http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/methanehydrateclub

Greg

PS: If anyone else wants to look at these files, let me know and I
will forward them on to you. It'd be good to get other opinions.

This is what I boiled down from your prediction on Yahoo. Is this
correct? Care to add anything?
What is a CV storm?
CV is Cape Verde for Cape Verde Islands. In a line with those
islands thunderstorms roll off Africa. These storms are literally
the most electrically explosive on earth. The strikes are much more
discharging than those in tornado alley in the US. What happens is
between the US, Central America, and South America and Africa, HUGE
voltages of negative charges are taken from the ionosphere during the
peak of the hurricane seasson. (That peak, BTW, a bell shaped curved,
due to dams and human activity like CO2 increases, has SHIFTED later,
about 3 weeks, which is why we saw to December TS last year). When
those strikes make the ionosphere even more positive than it is
typically, along the Equatorial Current in the Atlantic, where there
is impedance values that bring electrons to the ocean surface
relative to an earth EMF which is CREATED by this convection and the
patterns in the first place, there is a zone where any forming ice
crystals get "zapped". Elongated. Ice forms with radical
assymetry. Nearby in what is called the ITCZ, or inter tropical
convergence zone, water that is NOT forming ice and trapping heat
along the Equatorial current moves over the Gulf Stream. There, the
current is moving such that induction ges the other way, and
impedance provides a more positive charge to the ocean. There is
less of a displacement field between ocean and ionosphere and the
cirrus form with more symmetry and trap infra red heat. Any kind of
distrubrance off the African coast will start a pulse, or wave of
electrical activity, and because the dielectric of water is 80 times
that of air, the electrical and the convective processes couple and
self organize there. Tropical storms form when a POINT of charges
form, and organize what is the traditional high pressure of fair
weather and displacement currents with low pressures and convection
and charge separations.

What is a fish storm?
A storm that doesn't landfall in the Atlantic, like Fabian last
year. Although there are some people on Bermuda who wouldn't like
the term.

===============================================
Isabel reduces the chance for a following year tropical storm.

From landfalling in the same place. Like Izzy hit the year before
last and nothing landfell up the Mississippi delta. However, what I
was looking for and saw was an almost exact and continuing pattern of
fair and convective weather from the GOM to the hydrate fields off
the Carolina coasts. I think another Carolina storm landfalls again
this year, Indeed, I predict it. I also predict, however, a drought
developing in Florida consistant with this same flow pattern and what
it means electrically. As the strike link shows this later in the
season, I will actually point it out to you real time. It's quite
interesting to see and think about.

My view is we certainly will indeed see a fish storm then the danger
for
a US landfall occurs.
IOWs a Fabian storm changes the electrical balance and causes,
electrically, conditions to be ripe for a landfalling storm. Kind of
like you have to rub the glass rod with silk first before that rod
brought near your head makes your hair stand up .

We could have an extremely wet CV season off the African coast.
Later, again, in a shifted season, when the CV season starts we will
have wave after wave coming from W. Africa, and some of them will go
south toward the Caribean Islands, unlike last year.

Thunderstorm activity won't cause a storm to be pushed so far north.
The drought in Florida--a smaller degree of TS activity in the SE
will mean, electrically, less chance of a storm being carried north
later in the CV season. This is based on a decreasing amount of
algae patch activity.

CV storms are more likely to go south.

I would not be surprised to see storms move like Izzy did two years
ago
[note: into Mexico at the Yucatan Peninsula].

Later in the season, the Izzy kind of storm becomes more likely.
Because the Mississipp is active again and the CV storms more likely
move through the Caribean first.

[An] [e]arly Allison like storm is likely.

The W. Caribbean will see a cat 4 or 5 storm later in the year.

Greg

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Third exchange of emails
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Based on your last post, here then are what I believe are your
predictions for the 2004 'cane season. Comments by me are in
[brackets].

1) Isabel reduce[d] the chance for a following year tropical storm
from landfalling in the same place. [Mike: Doesn't this conflict
with your later statement: "I think another Carolina storm landfalls
again this year, indeed, I predict it."]

It reduces the probability that we see a Carolina landfall, but I
still think one will occur anyway. BTW, if you have seen the SOI
index lately, it went down to minus 63, which is a very large
reading. We haven't seen that kind of SOI reading since 1997 with
the 500 year El Nino for that year. The NOAA models on ENSO show an
El Nino developing, and historically, El Nino means less tropical
storm activity. It also causes a relative NE movement of the storms,
IMHO. Anyway, what we have seen recently with Dr. Gray is early in
the season as the SOI is strongly negative and the hurricane season
is slow he has adjusted his numbers down, then when the shifted
season hits he points back to his earlier prediction. I have had to
say both that the El Nino is an interesting factor AND that we still
will have the big numbers--which shows you some of the power of
clarity and coupling that occurs when you understand the forcing and
the modulation involved.

After Camille went up the Mississippi delta, the following year there
were no hurricanes to run up the delta. Why? My view it has to do
with the ecological, algae patch changes that occur from the roiling
of a hurricane. Camille, BTW, followed river changes to the
Mississippi. The two hurricanes that went up the delta two years ago
followed similar river changes to the delta lakes. Yet with Isabel,
the storm struck later in the season and wasn't anything like a
catagory 5 as it approached the Carolina coasts. Nothing in the
drought and strike pattern I have seen following Isabel would
diminish the impact of huge hydrate fields off the coast of the
Carolinas -- and predicted luner or moon tides are going to also be
favorable for the same pattern as last year to evolve (a fair weather
strip that runs from the central GOM and some algae patch there to
the Carolina coast). This pattern, electrically, creates a guiding
strip or ridge of fair weather that CV storms track along--with a
beeline for the Carolinas given the hydrate fields there.

The only question is El Nino, and the tendency of prevailing El Nino
electrical patterns to cause fish storms.

2) I also predict a drought developing in Florida. [This might be
difficult to prove since one year does not a drought make.]
I have been watching the drought monitor and a dry patch is starting
to grow there. If storms get turned NE that pattern will devolope
but then end in the winter, as during an El Nino Florida always gets
very strong rain.

3) My view is we certainly will indeed see a fish storm then the
danger for a US landfall occurs. [Don't we see fish storms nearly
every season?
And you really see them during a typical El Nino season--nuttin' but.
Do you mean a fish storm nearly immediately followed by a US landfall
storm?]
Yes. AKA Fabian/Isabel.

4) We could have an extremely wet CV season off the African coast.
[Can you define "extremely wet" in this context?]
Well above average. Late. IE the bell curve shifted---about a month
for the CV season.

5) Later, we will have wave after wave coming from W. Africa, and
some of them will go south toward the Caribbean Islands, unlike last
year. [Don't we normally have "wave after wave from W. Africa" during
hurricane season? So is the key point here, "some will go south"?]
We don't always have them. BTW, once you start to understand the
electrical meaning of the storms, you can see how an existing storm
off the African coast coming in contact with an existing storm will
die off the coast and seems to strengthen the existing TS downflow.
That's because we are talking about water ice forming or not in DC
fields, and water vapor diffusing movements. An existing TS in the
ITCZ dominates the hydro electrical organization of the region, and
storms rolling off the W. African coast only add to the positive
charge of the ionosphere and the defining features of the defining TS
by DC field and cloud microphysics. BUT, once Fabian was over
Iceland, Isabel could occur and did occur and will occur--and move
west, and the bi polar nature of the north EMF, with two nodes, one
over NA over the Hudson Bay and one over Europe, begin to influence
the global electrical patterns that cause these largest of storms to
track the way they do. In the end, the biosphere winds, and gets its
rain from these storms. And even close calls cause Doran waves
ashore, and rain feedbacks. But just like the clouds patterning the
way they did off the Pacific coast west of here, when the CV season
is on and the storms are tracking west, the clouds get modulated just
offshore of the Carolinas and charge separations occur from Doran
waves ashore and that fair weather strip comes NE over the North
Atlantic, and the storms get guided. My view is this happens despite
El Nino, but it's a tough call.

6) [There is] less chance of a storm being carried north later in the
CV season. CV storms are more likely to go south.
LATER in the season. Early, El Nino like SOI and SSTs rip them up.
Meterologists will blame El Nino like 'shear'. It's sun circling the
earth BS, because it isn't framed in global large scale EMFs and
cloud microphysics, in viscousity problems, and it is based on
correlations and not real couplings, but it later in the year comes
the dangers.

7) I would not be surprised to see storms move like Izzy did two
years ago[note: into Mexico at the Yucatan Peninsula]. Later in the
season, the Izzy kind of storm becomes more likely.

8) [An] [e]arly Allison like storm is likely.

Funny I made that prediction just as Texas got hit already with the
rains. You should have seen the strike activity over Texas a few
days ago, and then it moved over the delta. The strike activity on
early Tuesday morning over Texas was so intense that it caused
a "short" between storms over the ocean and over Nevada and we got
rain about three in the morning despite a forecast of zero percent
chance of rain. It was awesome to watch and understand. Again,
understand, that the dielectric constant of water is about 80 times
that of air, so when you have these intense electrical events (which
went with a rising SOI from minus 63 and a very strong solar wind)
occur patterns follow clouds--and you can see from the strikes and
with your knowledge of that dielectric where the electrical forcing
will occur and CREATE new clouds. This is why weather models are
complete crap after 5 days--yet why we have a deterministic thing
called climate.

9) The W. Caribbean will see a cat 4 or 5 storm later in the year. [I
have assumed this is not the same as prediction #8, since Allison was
an early, weak, Cat 1 storm, albeit with lots of rain.

Greg

--- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, mike@u... wrote:
> From the drought monitor I am interested in four main features of
the
> global macrobiological electrical circuit as it relates to US
> landfalling cyclones. First, the obvious one is tha the earth EMF
> over the Hudson Bay has weakened. I could get into some detail WHY
> but this is observed--so it is for another post. The second is
CAP,
> or the Colorado Arizona Project, which is a source of reduced flow
of
> water down the Colorado into the Gulf of California (GOC). In
> between these two points of field and conductivity changes is a
> subtropical jet, which has been highly weakened. As a result,
there
> has been a persistant drought in between the GOC and the Hudson Bay
> node that you can see clearly in the drought monitor data.
>
> Third, a dam was constructed in the Carolinas last year and there
was
> even a black algae patch seen off the Carolina coast. Fourth,
there
> was also level and delta lake construction projects in the
> Mississippi last year and I assume further work this year. Much of
> the result of the Mississippi changes in hydrology from human
> influences resultes in the erosion of the delta and for the
detritus
> to flow more directly to the deeper portions of the Gulf of Mexico
> (GOM) which results in very strong health of biogenic hydrates.
The
> algae seems to do quite well, too, and a red tide existed last year
> north of the Yukatan in the GOM for much of the tropical storm
> season. This area of convection and great conductivity was
amplified
> by the poor EMF in the SW, and connected, electrically, to the
> instability over the Carolinas.
>
> The connection was a looping kind that resulted in an offshore flow
> and upwelling off the Carolinas. Isabel certainly did come and
stir
> and roil the waters which generally speaking reduces the chance for
a
> following year tropical storm, from a conductivity standpoint.
> Indeed, that is what happened two years ago in the Mississippi
delta
> and caused me to correctly predict no landfalling in the
Mississippi
> delta last year.
>
> My friend Steve MacDonald has completed a moon gravity wave
analysis
> of the tropical storm season. His analysis calls for an increased
> level of roiling. So there is nothing from the moon to prevent a
> continued connection as above.
>
> John Daly's solar statistician Landstiedt (I probably do not spell
> his name correctly) also calls for nothing interesting from a solar
> standpoint, as in El Nino. This is interesting because NOAAs
models
> currently call for one. El Nino reduces hurricanes, but the
> question, electrically, is not if there will be El Nino SSTs but if
> there will be electrical patterns that prevent tropical storms from
> landfalling. My view is they will not, and if you look at 1997,
this
> is extremely important, as all the storms, few as they were,
> were "fish" storms and hooked harmlessly out to the North
Atlantic.
> My view is we certainly will indeed see a fish storm, perhaps the
> first big CV one like Fabian, but once we get one, the global
> electrical circuit will be ready for an electrical readjustment
back--
> which is when the danger for a US landfall occurs. Nothing in this
> picture prevents another Carolina landfall. Indeed, with the
> winter's fires and dust storms in West Africa and dams there,
> upwelling currently with cold SSTs, we could have an extremely wet
CV
> season off the African coast, and waves coming off either to
energies
> existing CV storms or create another one.
>
> The connection between the GOM, as described above, and Carolinas,
> will exist again. The dry patch in Florida has grown, and the
> residual black algae patch, the red tides there, have decreased.
> Florida waters should be less conductive and hence thunderstorm
> activity off Doran waves from a large TS won't cause a storm to be
> pushed so far north, IMHO. Further, there was small volcanic
activity
> in the East Caribean this winter, and that should increase SOx
based
> marine macrobiology there. More conductive waters to the south
means
> that CV storms are more likely to go south. There are some other
> things going on here, but I would not be surprised to see storms
move
> like Izzy did two years ago.
>
> Early Allison like storm is likely. We continue to have low SOx
and
> the GOM is very conductive. It will all depend on when the moon
> gravity wave comes through. Later, from blooms from roiling,
> depending on the path, we could see an echo storm in the GOM.
Later
> in the season, the Izzy kind of storm becomes more likely. Florida
> will see growing drought conditions and chances of fires in the
fire
> season.
>
> The season will again be shifted and above well above averages of
the
> past 100 years. The W. Caribean will see a cat 4 or 5 storm later
in
> the year.
>
> See:
>
> http://drought.unl.edu/dm/monitor.html
>
> Other comments:
>
> 1. Comments on William Gray's forecast:
>
> http://hurricane.atmos.colostate.edu/forecasts/2003/dec2003/
>
> According to the popular press, the leading forecaster in the world
> on hurricanes is Dr. William Gray out of CSU. The above link is to
> his more recent forecast. Gray is a skeptic, BTW. Macrobiology
> requires a dynamic modulating large scale electrical features.
> Macrobiology factors are much better explained in terms other than
> air pressures and winds, much like the movements of the planets are
> much better explained by the fact that the sun has more mass and
the
> force of gravity from it better described the movement of the
> planets, despite what the dogma of the past was that the earth
> revolved around the sun.
>
> The PRIMARY flaw in all climate models is that they fail to couple
> cloud behaviors, kinetics, if you will, with radiative and heat
> trapping trends. Indeed, a more recent paper stated that what heat
> dynamics should be given more green house gases recently hasn't
been
> matched with water vapor trends, which is in my opinion more
> gaia . . . but I will leave that for another day here. Given this
> primary flaw, Gray's correlative studies actually DO show coupling.
> That is, given a certain condition, hurricanes are coupled to it.
> This is a start, anyway. But we are still left with, given the
narrow
> approach, the sun circles around the earth approach, that ocean
SSTs
> can be over 84 degrees, and it can be in the middle of September,
and
> it can be as clear a sky as there is space in JBW's head. While Dr.
> Gray is discussing a climate coupling, as opposed to the weather
> coupling I am discussing, it is a step in the right direction
because
> he is capturing longer term electro static trends.
>
> I do not directly use correlative statistics, and think that Gray's
> approach is flawed because of a changing experience base, and what
I
> do use couples behaviors so strongly that I can go places where
Gray
> will not--like predicting a landfalling event. So, without much
more
> ado, lets go over Gray's Preditors and discuss them:
>
> Predictor 1. November 500 MB Geopotential Height in the far North
> Atlantic (+)
>
> (67.5-85°N, 10E-50°W) Positive values of this predictor correlate
> very strongly (r = -0.7) with negative values of the Arctic
> Oscillation (AO) and the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). Negative
> AO and NAO values imply more ridging in the central Atlantic and a
> likely warm north Atlantic Ocean (50-60°N, 10-50°W). Also, on
decadal
> timescales, weaker zonal winds in the subpolar areas are indicative
> of a relatively strong thermohaline circulation which is favorable
> for hurricane activity. Positive values of this November index are
> negatively correlated with both 200 mb zonal winds and trade wind
> strength the following September in the tropical Atlantic. The
> associated reduced tropospheric vertical wind shear enhances
> conditions for TC development. Other features that are directly
> correlated with this predictor are low sea level pressure in the
> Caribbean and a warm North and Tropical Atlantic. Both of the
latter
> are also hurricane-enhancing factors.
>
> Ocean current directions have different impedence meaning. The NAO
is
> no different. What then occurs is strong displacement currents will
> elongate heat trapping cirrus trying to form, and cause, relatively
> speaking, water vapor movements to where the ice forming is more
> effective outside of the displacement current. Put another way, if
an
> ocean current inducts in such a manner as to bring electrons to the
> surface, between that ocean surface and the relatively positively
> charged ionosphere, ice trying to form elongates and doesn't take
in
> water vapor as well. Phase change energies relatively go elsewhere,
> and that air has a tendency to fall, and pressures rise. Because
this
> region with warm currents and much ocean, as well as near the north
> EMF pole(s) -- there is an ability to look at what is occurring
with
> the measures and make longer range predictions on how clouds will
> behave later in the tropical
> storm season.
>
> Predictor 2. October-November SLP in the Gulf of Alaska (-)
>
> (45-65°N, 120-160°W) Negative values of this predictor are strongly
> associated with a positive Älaskan pattern" (Renwick and Wallace
> 1996) as well as a positive "Pacific North American Pattern" (PNA)
> which implies reduced blocking over the central Pacific with
> increased heights over the western United States. The negative mode
> of this predictor is typically associated with current warm eastern
> Pacific equatorial SST conditions which usually lead to cool ENSO
> conditions the following year. Low sea level pressure is observed
to
> occur in the Gulf of Alaska with a decaying El Niño event, and
> anomalously high pressure is observed with a weakening La Niña
event
> (Larkin and Harrison 2002). Negative values of this predictor
> indicate that La Niña conditions are likely the following year
which
> tends to enhance Atlantic hurricane activity.
>
> This is a good place to discuss ENSO and hurricanes. A hurricane is
a
> unique electrical coupling between the ionosphere and the tropical
> oceans. It occurs typically from a wave that in a broader sense
> relies on the entire global electrical circuit. The tropics contain
> the warmest, most conductive currents, and hence where the largest
> electrical instabilities or storms can be expressed. This is why a
> hurricane can hit New York--because it is close to a large and
> conductive ocean current, the Gulf Stream, despite it having a
> location far north of were the largest radiative and heat trapping
> energies occur in the tropics. The biggest wind pattern in the
> tropics is the SOI, or Southern Oscillation index. This index will,
> like the NAO, change induction, as well as gas exchanges, which
then
> impact conductivities and, again, how water vapor forms on heat
> trapping cirrus or not. Pulses of electrical currents can move
along
> the tropics and aid in formation of North Atlantic storms with much
> better effectiveness given the La Nina state, and this much has
been
> well correlated. What I have seen specifically, when a strong
> negative SOI trends strongly positive--that is when the most likely
> time to see a tropical storm form in the Atlantic. If an El Nino is
> occurring--the values basically stay negative and no storms form.
>
> Predictor 3. September 500 MB Geopotential Height in Western North
> America (+)
>
> (35-55°N, 100-120°W) Positive values of this predictor correlate
very
> strongly (r = 0.8) with positive values of the PNA. PNA values are
> usually positive in the final year of an El Niño event (Horel and
> Wallace 1981). Therefore, cooler ENSO conditions are likely during
> the following year. Significant lag correlations exist between this
> predictor and enhanced geopotential height anomalies in the
> subtropics during the following summer. High heights in the
> subtropics reduce the height gradient between the tropics and
> subtropics resulting in easterly anomalies at 200 mb throughout the
> tropics which favor hurricane development.
>
> This is another El Nino factor, but if there was something I tried
to
> make clear to everyone here that since El Nino is poorly defined
for
> what it is, how it COUPLES with cloud behaviors of any sort is
> likewise so flawed.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/methanehydrateclub/message/2134
>
> So, I am going to use this as an opportunity to teach about how
> clouds uncouple thermally given macrobiological changes. The above
> link is also discussing the same geographical area, and what are
> called the Santa Ana winds. These winds end up causing upwelling
and
> colder SSTs. Normally, one would then think that will colder SSTs
we
> would see less rain--but as it turns out, at some point rains come,
> the oceans heat up by cloud behaviors, just like an La Nina turns
> into an El Nino. From a thermal standpoint, it makes no sense that
> something cold becomes warm and something warm becomes cold UNLESS
> there is a counterforcing. That forcing is biological. Upwelling
> leads to greater nutrient
>
> content and that leads to increases in conductiivty, DESPITE the
fact
> that decreases in ocean surface temperature, independant of life,
> would lead to LESS conductivity. Life is your source of a flip
flop.
> A Santa Ana, and cold SSTs, like we have right now off the coast of
> California, will be a sign of changing weather patterns down the
> road!
>
> Predictor 4. July 50 MB Equatorial U (-)
>
> (5°S-5°N, 0-360) Easterly anomalies of the QBO during the previous
> July indicate that the QBO will likely be in the west phase during
> the following year's hurricane season. The west phase of the QBO
has
> been shown to provide favorable conditions for development of
> tropical cyclones in the deep tropics according to Gray et al.
(1992,
> 1993, 1994) and Shapiro (1989). Hypothetical mechanisms for how the
> QBO affects hurricanes are as follows: a) Atlantic TC activity is
> inhibited during easterly phases of the QBO due to enhanced lower
> stratospheric wind ventilation and increased upper-troposphere-
lower-
> stratosphere wind shear, and b) for slow moving systems, the west
> phase of the QBO has a slower relative wind (advective wind
relative
> to the moving system) than does the east phase. This allows for
> greater coupling between the lower stratosphere and the
troposphere.
>
> This is a place where I can say without doubt that Dr. Gray's
> speculation here is fundimentally flawed. The state of the global
> electrical circuit as expressed by very very low pressure winds
above
> the tropics are fundimentally about the state of the global
electric
> circuit and how that circuit moves a conductor. Since the QBO is
not
> dense AND conductive, its low mass can be motivated in an EMF, just
> like an electric motor is turned in a current. This movement
> conceptually follows Fleming's LEFT hand rule. Because tropical
> storms are electro static in organization, the become less likely
to
> occur given a QBO state because it reflects global electrical
circuit
> extremes.
>
> Predictor 5. September-November SLP in the Gulf - SE USA (-)
>
> (15-35°N, 75-95°W) This feature is strongly related to the
following
> year's August-September sea level pressure in the tropical and
> subtropical Atlantic. August-September SLP in the tropical Atlantic
> is one of the most important predictors for seasonal activity, that
> is, lower-than-normal sea level pressure is favorable for more TC
> activity. Low pressure in this area during September-November
> correlates quite strongly with the positive phase of the PNA. In
> addition, easterlies at 200 mb throughout the tropical Atlantic are
> typical during the following year's August-September period with
low
> values of this predictor.
>
> The question I would ask is--how are electrical currents flowing?
> Cold oceans don't mean ppoor electrical flow, and at the same time,
> warm SSTs don't mean anything, either, because biological activity
> from upwelling of depletion of those nutrients after warming and
> upwelling ends, can mean relative reduction in conductivity. Again,
> correlations can be drawn, but the more important question is--what
> do they MEAN?
>
> Predictor 6. November SLP in the Subtropical NE Pacific (+)
>
> (7.5-22.5°N, 125-175°W) This feature is also strongly related to
the
> following year's August-September sea level pressure in the
tropical
> and subtropical Atlantic. High pressure in this area correlates
with
> low sea level pressure in the tropical Atlantic and easterly
> anomalies at 200 mb during the following August through September
> period. According to Larkin and Harrison (2002), high pressure in
> this area appears during most winters preceding the development of
a
> La Niña event. High pressure in this region forces stronger trade
> winds in the east Pacific which increases upwelling and helps
> initiate La Niña conditions which eventually enhance Atlantic
> hurricane activity during the following summer. In addition, this
> predictor correlates with low geopotential heights at 500 mb
> throughout the tropics the following year which is also
> favorable for more hurricane activity in the Atlantic.
>
> This again is about where at 500 MB cirrus are found, and 200 mb is
> where the ionosphere starts to become interesting, and shows how
the
> sub tropical jet is going to behave, in all likelihood, given bio
> electrical trends.
>
> What looks to be a factor I am looking at this year, compared to
Dr.
> Gray's "predictors"?
>
> Static attraction, repulsion movement of the carbon monoxide
relative
> to the West African fires (see link below).
>
> We do know that per Fleming's right hand rule and impedance
> guidelines, that the Equatorial currents will put electrons on the
> ocean surface. Put another way, there is a positive vector
downwards
> into the ocean just based on the direction of current. Since
opposits
> repel, we should expect, then, for the carbon monoxide, which
carries
> a negative charge, to repel against the Equatorial and move
> elsewhwere. Conversely, over the ionosphere where there is little
> convection in the Equatorial regions, the ionosphere is
particularly
> positive. In other words, this is a region with fair weather
voltages
> to ground--about 100 to 250 volts per meter as measured
emperically.
> Africa is the most struck places on earth, so there is plenty of
> charges taken out of the lower ionsphere nearby for this to be
> particularly true along the warm, and therefore conductive waters
of
> the Equatorial, and South America during the period of December
thru
> February also has thunderstorms which will take negative charges
out
> of the air. So, since opposits attract, why won't the ozone move
over
> the Equatorial toward the ionosphere? Then factor in ambiant winds,
> pressures, rain patterns, inversion layers--it's all too
complicated
> of a mess, right?
>
> However, the BIOLOGICAL impact that is important here will only be
> relative to the ocean. Thus, while some carbon monoxide may indeed
be
> attracted to the fair weather zones of the Equatorial regions of
the
> ionosphere, the carbon monoxide that is moving toward the positive
> charges to the surface of the ocean is what will matter later in
> terms of blooms associated with the ashe material that starts food
> chains. That movement is at this time of season going to be to the
S.
> Atlantic's ITCZ--where the current moves from east to west and
> inducts a positive current to the ocean surface. Plus, relative to
> the land ocean interface, there is likewise such a positive to
ground
> impact. Furthermore, the smoke initinally probably drops the phase
> change temperature of cirrus, along with causing elongation in any
> capactive field, such that water vapor would tend to diffuse to
> places where convection would more easiliy occur. In short, we see
> what we see by the Sahel, below.
>
> As many of you may well know by now I do a hurricane forecast
around
> April 1, and the past three years it has been the best in the
world,
> using the electro static gaia concepts I have poorly attempted to
> communicate to this fixed set of mindsets here. For instance, last
> year at this time I predicted the Carolina tropical storm
> landfalling. The reason I am able to make these predictions is
> because the systems discussed are coupled electrically, describing
> cloud behaviors in a much more effective manner than coupling
merely
> thermally cloud behaviors, and, more importantly, the modulations,
> which too are electrical, bring a determinism to an essentially
> complex and chaotic problem. My expectations are low, and while I
> hope for discussion, I don't expect it.
>
> Non-the-less, here is a preview, just for you all. I have been
> watching fires and dust storms in West Africa--which are probably
> connected to the dams there. Anyway, the soot runs out to the ocean
> and will impact the biosphere were the CV storms begin in a
> macroscopic manner.. Carbon monoxide is also electrical in its
> character and will impact cloud nucleation rates the same way that
> other ions do--and SSTs cooled where the carbon monoxide patterned,
> and patterned electrically in how it did impact those SSTs. Those
> SSTs as cooled later lead to upwelling and more biological material
> for later in the CV season.
>
> Same thing happened w/ the Florida fires and we had black algae
> patches off the W. Keys and tropical storms and heavy rains
> associated with the drought and fires they had. I was able to make
> some particularly accurate long range predictions based on that
black
> algae patch a few years ago . . .
>
> The CV season could be outragous--because the biological boost
comes
> with dams that delay the sed and flow of nutrients from what should
> be a rainy year for them given what soot and ash has deposited in
the
> nearby oceans and how that acts to cause blooms and increases in
> macro conductivities.
>
> I have some analysis about where these CV storms will go and what
> will happen early in the GOM, but this is the main scoop--fires and
> dust storms in Africa impacting the CV area.
>
>
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/natural_hazards_v2.php
> 3?img_id=11981
>
> 2 Rare Tropical Storm in S. Atlantic followed by hurricane there.
>
>
http://manati.wwb.noaa.gov/qscat_archive21/QS2004019/zooms/WMBds27.png
>
>
> On 19 January 2004 another cyclonic circulation developed in the
> South Atlantic Ocean just east of Salvador, Brazil. Satellite
images
> and scatterometer winds (indicating tropical storm strength) are
> presented below. Here is satellite pictures of the second tropical
> cyclone to ever form in the south Atlatnic ocean!
>
> http://www.met-
> office.gov.uk/sec2/sec2cyclone/tcimages/Misc/jan2004sat.gif
>
> What needs to be appreciated about the IR and visable shots is the
> half circle of dots of clouds around the storm--this is where it
gets
> its electrical pattern from--the charge separations of convection
> make the ionosphere around the storm relatively positive. Plus it
is
> in the form of a "wave" in that the ITCZ extends to Africa, where
> there is also convection in particular on the terresphere.
>
> Here where there is more information:
>
> http://www.met-office.gov.uk/sec2/sec2cyclone/tcimages/Misc/
>
> There was a good solar wind event, as David points out here, that
day
> and the days preceeding it:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/methanehydrateclub/message/2090
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/methanehydrateclub/message/2091
>
> Bio link? Yep:
>
>
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/natural_hazards_v2.php
> 3?img_id=11913
>
> South of the storm, a good algae bloom occurred and was seen on sat
> three days before the storm. Because of the counter current there,
> the circumpolar which normally inducts against cirrus production by
> its direction and orientation of the earth EMF, anomaly warm air
> temperatures and melting bergs have been seen. Again, algae is more
> conductive than the oceans because in order to maintain hydrostatic
> pressure by osmosis, the algae must be more ionized then the ocean
> the creatures are contained in.
>
> "http://www.john-daly.com/soi-mnth.gif
>
> Note the SOI on the 19th swinging positive to negative. This is
> something you see with big electrical events in the Atlantic as it
> impacts the SOI. In fact, it qued the small negative readings we
saw
> at the end of the month. I suspect more effect then cause on the
SOI
> as this is a big electro mechanical event--a storm this size.
>
> Steve MacDonald actually pointed out the storm to me in one of his
> moon gravity wave presentations about a month ago, but I didn't
know
> that this was an actual tropical storm. The gravity wave began in
the
> South Pacific and actually was headed toward the southern tip of S.
> America and then went northeast over Southern South America until
it
> went right over the area of the tropical storm. My view is once
over
> the S. Atlantic the gravity wave caused a gas exchange increase in
> conductivity relative to the ITCZ and you got the convection of the
> ITCZ to support, electrically, an electrical pattern of this
> magnetude. I wish I had the actual pictures from Steve MacDonald to
> link for the fair reader, because you cannot meaningfully see the
> overlay of gravity wave (moon position) and cloud behavior, knowing
> it is all about capacitive coupling and displacement currents, and
> not see that something is going on there. Once the gravity wave was
> over on the S. Atlantic side--boom. The cloud mass exploded. Now, I
> realize I think and understand way better than I write this, but
the
> roiling gas exchanges from the gravity wave from the moon isn't
going
> to do anything over land--as the land isn't stirred by the moon to
> cause a gas exchange change in conductitivy--so it is really
> interesting that once the moon's gravity wave substantially crossed
> over South America--that's when the cloud explosion occurred.
>
>
> http://www.nrlmry.navy.mil/tc_pages/tc_home.html
>
> Here is a good link on the first hurricane ever in the S.
Atlantic.
> It's a dated link from the Navy. The storm is called 01L.NONAME
> because the S. Americans have no set terms for catagorizing such
> storms.
>
> What is interesting is the solar wind was as elevated as we have
seen
> in a long time--following a lull. Read David's report:
>
> http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/methanehydrateclub
>
> What's interesting globally is there was a cat 4 to hit OZ and our
> dry snap ended with the storm below that I described. Now, the
solar
> wind up like this impacted this storm because it was forecasted to
> last 24 hours and we had rain for THREE days. Last night over the
> tornado ally there was almost a 10,000 strike event to go w/ TS
> there.
>
>
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions/multi_season/13_seas
> onal_outlooks/color/churchill.html
>
> Above link ENSO based long range forecast. This forecast is
> statistical. I will give a causal explaination. What happens with
La
> Nina like conditions is prevailing winds (Santa Anna, off shore)
for
> us here in No Cal up to Washington mean blooms and algae patches
that
> cause cloud dynamics that both compress air (heating) and increase
> precip by the mechanisms as described below.
>
>
>
> http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/data/anomnight.3.20.2004.gif
>
> SST anomalies along our coast are warm otherwise except for the
area
> of upwelling--but note that despite that the SSTs are cold just
there
> along the coast, they are relatively more conductive because of the
> bloom, despite the fact that colder oceans are less conductive than
> warmer. IOWs, here you have this extremely rare hurricane in the
the
> South Atlantic and SSTs are COLD anomaly. Thermodynamics alone
does
> not explain!
>
>
> Space weather--or electo particles from the sun--is slow at this
time:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/methanehydrateclub/message/2138
>
> for an existing storm like this--recall that voltages that are
moved
> along the closed isobars of the earth EMF are quite small and the
> nearby strikes and thunderstorms patterned to the east are going to
> have a larger influence--this gets to signal noise and what level
of
> electrical energy from space is enough to pattern clouds given
> electrical conditions on earth near where it might matter.
>
>
> For those really interested in full electro cloud dynamic, check
out
> this link:
>
> http://www.lightningstorm.com
>
> for current strike data. Just because there are no strikes along
the
> coast doesn't mean there isn't a DC field from ionosphere to ocean
or
> some charge separations and negative voltages to ground with
> convection along our coast. Keep in mind, too, that the north EMF
> pole has a node over Hudson Bay, and that strikes are FRACTAL
> evidence of large scale waves of ionospheric alternating voltages.
>
>
>
>
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/Archive/Mar2004/CAchlo
> ro_seawifs2004076_lrg.jpg
>
>
>
> Explaination. I live, as you may know, in Redding California.
> Notice from the above map the algae bloom along the Northern
> California Coast. What I observed on radar from a storm that came
in
> is cloud avoided the area over the dense algae patch. What was
> happening is there was a coupling between ionosphere and ocean
there,
> and cirrus elongated and hence convection formed poorly there.
Water
> vapor diffused east and west and created instability in the clouds
> and compressed the clouds as the flow of diffusing water vapor was
> counter to the circulation. I have saved a TWC radar shot of the
> clouds from the storm if any one is interested.
>
> This helps the macrobiosphere there where the algae patch is
because
> it causes precip and eventually river run off (nutrients) to the
same
> place where the algae exist, and at the same time keeping the area
> cloud free for light to aid in photosynthesis.
>
> 3. Isabel Analysis.
>
> There are many papers written, and sometimes it is long before
> society has any idea how important that paper is:
>
> http://www.ichmt.org/abstracts/Vim-01/abstracts/04-01.pdf
>
> "The effects of electric field on ice crystal growth had been
> numerically discussed by Scishcheve and Kusalike6-7. They announced
> that the strength of an electric field able to change the ice
lattice
> from normal ice(Ih) to cubic ice (Ic) should be at least 10 to the
> 5th kV/m [fair weather voltages are about 10 to the -1 k volts per
> meter]. However, the strength of the electric field used in our
> experiments was only 1/400 of the 10 to the 5th kV/m [fair weather
> voltages would be on order of 1/1,000,000 of these voltages,
whereas
> w/ tropical storm transiants above the eye, the transiant ratios
> would be similar to the experiments]. Thus, the morphological
change
> of the ice in this study was not caused by the ice lattice change.
> Without the electric field, the crystal growth process could be
> considered as a process whereby the water molecules are added one
by
> one to the crystal lattice. This 'adding' process has normally the
> same probability in all directions, and leads to the formation of
the
> symmetric ice crystal [figure omitted]. However, when a high
voltage
> field is applied, the electric field may cause different molecules
in
> the DMSO solution[a weak acid--what should be noted is rain water
is
> slightly acidic from the CO2 and other particles that get dissolved
> in the air--with a pH of about 5.6] to exhibit different behaviors.
> The polar water molecules/clusters may be torqued and rearranged
> under the action of the electric field and forced to joining the
> lattice in a special orientation and position. Hence, different
> growth rates occur in different directions and the ice crystal
> becomes asymmetric. Under the action of an electric field, the
water
> molecules may rearrange and line up end to end in the direction of
> the electric field. In viewing the crystal structure, this well-
> ordered water molecules/clusters seems like crystal or quasi-
> crystallines. In this case the water molecules/clusters possess an
> ideal situation for rapid crystal growth. That may be the reason
why
> the main branches, which are parallel to the direction of the
> electric field, grow faster than the other branches."
>
> Once there in fact is experimental proof of a different growth rate
> by EMF dynamics, which there is ABOVE, you can infer that in a
> hurricane, where there are known DC fields of the same scale as in
> these Chinese experiments on ice formations in DC fields, with the
> ocean spray from 150 plus MPH winds containing all the ions needed
> and matching what was in the experiment. What then happens are
> asymmetric changes where water vapor goes due to the growth rates--
to
> the more symmetrical forming cirrus. In other words, diffusion
> pressure will cause a movement of water vapor toward the clouds NOT
> in the strong DC capactive field--meaning not in the eye, because
the
> eye contains no cloud cover, no water to form a strong dielectric
> that would instead exist in the clouds. Phase change energies are
> then organized. The eye is where DC fields have been OBSERVED. This
> is published, peer reviewed science. It is science I am not
> publishing, only science I am pointing out.
> Electrically, the storm is organized.
>
> On September 13, 2003, for instance, the Air Force Reserve
Hurricane
> Hunters made several of their 39 center fixes on Hurricane Isabel.
> That day the NOAA Hurricane Hunters made two formal center fixes
and
> flew seven research missions into the storm. The highest winds
> measured by the aircraft were 158 kt (Air Force at 700 mb) and 157
kt
> (NOAA at 8400 ft) between 1700-1730 UTC 13 September. A 156-kt
flight-
> level wind (700 mb) was also observed at 1719 UTC 12 September.
> Stronger winds were observed on eyewall dropsondes, with a maximum
of
> 203 kt reported at 806 mb (4500 ft) at 1753 UTC 13 September. This
is
> the strongest wind ever observed in an Atlantic hurricane, although
> it likely does not represent a 1-min average. Given the multiple
> mesovortices, if you think of those like tornadoes, even 300 mph
> isn't that hard to believe. That speed in kts represents a MPH wind
> speed of 233.45 MPH. Here's a picture of the 13th when those record
> readings were made:
>
>
> http://www.sunsetbreezes.com/s/GOES030913-1715-ir.jpg
>
> http://www.sunsetbreezes.com/s/20030913-1742vis13LISABEL130kts-
935mb-
> 221N-610W.jpg
>
> What you should notice about the mesovortices from an IR standpoint
> is the symmetry.
>
> Down below I will point out what that means to Prof.
> Kassin's "analogy".
>
> The circle of the eye relates to the electrical charge organization
> of the storm inside the eye. This organization comes from the fact
> that the roiling winds are in somewhat of a circular path (there is
a
> Nature paper by Bates et all on gas exchanges during Hurricane
Felix
> from 1999)--and gas exchanges increase conductivities and the eye
> itself offers a dielectric of air compared to water. What you see
> very clearly from these images is a point NEGATIVE ionopsheric
event,
> with the positive voltages in the ionosphere above the storm in a
> ring, yet still inside the eye. The extremely positive charges
> couple to negative charges on the surface and ice in the center of
> the mesovortices elongates--the mesovortices conform to this
> organization in their centers falling and and rising air around
them,
> and then in their movement in a circle inside the eye.. The storm
> becomes progressively ellipse as opposed to circular the further
away
> from the electrically organizing center the cirrus disk is.
>
> Because the main organizing forcing in climate is ELECTRICAL, as so
> demonstrated above, this has profound implications on Gaia theory
and
> abiogenesis
>
> Link for refresher on static electrical forces.
>
>
http://dept.physics.upenn.edu/courses/gladney/phys151/lectures/lecture
> _jan_13_2003.shtml
>
> Quantify it.
>
> http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~dennis/paper010723.pdf
>
> I like this Hartmann/Fu paper best. Check out figure on page 22
> entitled Net Cloud Radiative forcing. This tells you how important
> cloud dynamics are in heat dynamics.
> Thankfully, the complexities of cloud heat retention is simplified,
> visually, by IR loops. I use them all the time to seen how the EMF
is
> altering cirrus when watching a hurricane real time.
>
> Strikes do not occur in cirrus disk, because one, dielectric of
water
> in disk eighty times that of air in cyclops eye, and charge
> separations from convection bringing positive voltages to upper
cloud
> mass finds a relatively more positive ionosphere and lower cloud
with
> negative charges finds relatively negative charges on ocean
surface.
> Cirrus in the disk are elongated in displacement current. This
> occurrence can even be seen in smaller scale in the 5 vortices and
> thinner but clearly seen cirrus cover inside the eye highlighting
the
> vortices. The center of each of the vortices is clear of clouds,
and
> the IR picture appears as 5 circles in a circle, with, again, the
> dielectric difference between air and water playing the part in
where
> the capacitive coupling takes place. More visuals:
>
> http://www.sunsetbreezes.com/s/GOES030912-1145ir.jpg
>
> http://www.sunsetbreezes.com/s/isabeleye09121145vis.jpg
>
>
>
> If a coupling takes place, the orientation of cirrus is to cause
them
> be inside a field which prevents cloud nucleation and cirrus heat
> trapping feedbacks.
>
> http://newsletter.dri.edu/1999/spring/Lightning.html
>
> There is little or no strike activity inside a hurricane.
>
> http://www.nalms.org/glossary/lkword_c.htm
>
> "When supercooled water and ice crystals occur at the same
location,
> the ice grows at the expense of the water, and an ice cloud forms.
> This occurs because at a given temperature ice has a greater
affinity
> than liquid water for water vapor. Cloud droplets and ice crystals
> first form on certain types of small particles of dust or other
> airborne materials. They are called condensation nuclei when water
> droplets are formed and ice nuclei when ice crystals result. The
> nuclei generally range in size from as small as 0.01 micrometer to
> about 1 micrometer (4/10,000,000 to 4/100,000 inch). The number of
> nuclei vary widely, depending on the source of the air mass in
which
> the parcel is imbedded. The atmosphere over the ocean generally has
> the lowest number of nuclei, whereas polluted air has the highest.
> The more nuclei, and therefore the more water droplets or ice
> crystals, the slower the process of formation of precipitation-
sized
> particles, because the competition for the available water is
> greater. Thus, although Rain often falls shortly after a cloud
forms
> over the ocean, a much longer time is required over continental
> areas."
>
> The China paper tells us that in a strong DC field the cloud
> microphysics become asymmetrical. That means, because the
ionosphere
> is relatively positively charged from thunderstorms separating out
> charges, and bringing negative voltages to ground in the form of
> strikes. (From the image above the key thing to see is how the eye
is
> circular with the idea that the ionosphere has a point NEGATIVE
> condition, with a ring of POSITIVE ions around it over the centers
of
> the mesovortices.)
>
>
>
> IONOSPHERE
>
> ....................-..............-
> .....................\............/
> ......................\........../
> .......................v .......v
> ........................^......^
> .........................\..../
> ..........................\../
> ..........................+.+
> ........- -----><----- + - + -----><----- -
> ............................+
> ............................|
> ............................|
> ............................v
> ............................^
> ............................|
> ............................|
> ............................-
>
> ATLANTIC SURFACE
>
> ....................+..............+
> .....................\............/
> ......................\........../
> .......................v .......v
> ........................^......^
> .........................\..../
> ..........................\../
> ...........................-.-
> .......+ -----><----- - + - -----><----- +
> ............................-
> ............................|
> ............................|
> ............................v
> ............................^
> ............................|
> ............................|
> ............................+
>
> Ionosphere Ocean Capacitive Coupling above Eye:
>
> ............................+..-..+
> ............................|..|..|
> ............................|..|..|
> ............................v..v..v
> ............................^..^..^
> ............................|..|..|
> ............................|..|..|
> ............................-..+..-
>
>
> Knowing that water vapor has a stronger dielectric constant is also
a
> necessary primer when talking about what you can pick up from the
> clouds, electrically, in terms of the patterns that are occurring.
> But let's keep it simple. Opposites attract. So a static field of
> positive voltages will attract negative--and if you are coupling
from
> ionosphere to ocean, if the ionosphere is negative, the ocean will
> experience magnetic flux that brings positive voltages to the
> surface. How the ocean and ionosphere couple, or connect from a
> capacitive description depends on the charges, the area of
> the "plates" and the dielectric between the "plates". Now, I
realize
> I simplify, but there is a huge difference between how the fields
in
> the ionosphere and on the ocean surface couple between air with
water
> and air with air. About an 80 times difference. And BTW when ice
> crystals are involved, there may even be more complexity (which
gets
> to how life could have a very strong impact on what is going one)
in
> that the ice forms little mini capacitors that can behave here much
> like doping in an amplifying transistor. So let's keep it simple
for
> the moment--there is a huge difference between water and air as a
> dielectric, and since phase change energies cumulated over a large
> area will bring relative energies and organize that area thermally,
> you couple electrical and thermal, electrical and Boyle's laws.
>
>
>
> So, with this background, let's revisit Prof. Kassin's comments:
>
>
> "there is a remarkable connection between the electron density
> redistribution problem recently studied in experimental plasma
> physics."
>
> This gets to electrostatics. Recall that the same signs repel and
> positive and negative charges attract one another.
>
> "The plasma experiment involves the creation of a confined pure
> elecron plasma in a cylindrical trap, with a uniform axial magnetic
> field providing radial confinement."
>
> Since water has a relatively much stronger dielectric constant
> compared to air, just over the eye of a hurricane, the charges in
the
> ionosphere will couple with the oceans--and you have in essance the
> very same trap as in the plasma experiment. Please tell me if you
> cannot follow this, and I will explain it further to you and draw
> more schematics for you.
>
> "Once produced the confined plasma evolves due to the drift flow,
> which is determied by the cross product of the electrical and
> magnetic fields (i.e., E * B drift).The drift flow is two
dimensional
> in a plane perpendicular to the axis of the cylinder. Since the
drift
> velocity changes the electron density according to an equation
> identical to the inviscid from of the voticity equation (3.4) and
> since the electron density is related to the Lapacian of the
> electrostatic potentical, the two dimensional equations for the
> evolution of the electron plasma are isomorphic with the two-
> dimensional Euler equations for inviscid incompressible flow
> (electron density vorticity and electrostatic potential
> streamfunction). Peurrung and Fajans (1993), Huang and Driscoll
> (1994), Fine et al. (1995). "
>
> Now, let's talk about air flows. Inviscid incompressible flow
> equations don't always calculate out neatly:
>
>
http://www.mas.ncl.ac.uk/~sbrooks/book/nish.mit.edu/2006/Textbook/Node
> s/chap04/node3.html#SECTION00210000000000000000
>
> We cannot always predict when such flows should be regarded as
> viscous and must be guided by experimental observation and
experience.
>
> See:
>
>
http://www.mas.ncl.ac.uk/~sbrooks/book/nish.mit.edu/2006/Textbook/Node
> s/chap04/node2.html
>
>
>
> The problem as I see it as the EMFs act on the cloud microphysics
the
> flows become viscous and Euler's equations are not helpful. But
> conceptually and basically, if at a point pressure is high, air
wants
> to expand away, low, air wants to be drawn in. So a low pressure
> point will chase a high pressure point, just like a negative charge
> will chase a positive charge. High and low pressure areas in the
> oceans have electrical properties in that high pressures bring
> positive voltages to ground and couple to electrons to the oceans
> surface, which elongates forming ice crystals, whereas over
> convective regions ice forms more symetically and capactivie
> couplings are prevented by the strong dielectric of water compared
to
> air.

Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.